SJ:
Yeah, I've long since given up SE4's AI Diplomacy model. There are too many inconsistancies and not enough ways to influence it. I pretty much just treat AI players as 'Minor Powers' to all the human player's 'Great Powers'.
SE4's Diplomacy would be immeasurebly helped if they actually did what they say they would. For example, when you ask them to 'Break treaty with 'X', and they agree, they should break the darned treaty. If they dont want to break it, thats fine, but tell me to p#ss up a rope, dont agree and then not do it. The same goes for 'Attack 'x' in 'y' system'. Why have the option there at all if it doesnt do anything? I've never seen the AI taken an active role in an Alliance. Its these aspects (as well as never going back to peace once in a war) that make SE4's Diplomacy seem so bland. The first couple should be quite fixable and I'm surprised that they are still not really working after all this time.
Basically I just see the AIs as someone to trade points with and to skirmish with. They provide some initial opposition while the players maneuver to build their empires. In that role, it really doesnt bother me at all. Now that I have discovered TCP/IP playing, I cant ever go back to single-player!
PBW seems intriguing, but I dont really have the patience for a game that Lasts for months. I also play with a homegrown mod that probably wouldnt be for everyone. Besides, I'm too busy tweaking it out after every game we play, so it will never be stable enough to play a long-term game with...its just too much fun to keep fiddling with the data and whatnot!
Maybe some day I'll look into one of the PBW games.
Thanx,
Talenn
Re: SEIV vs. MOO3....
Threaded Mode